|
Sierra
Front-Northwestern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council |
|
|
| |
Meeting Summary
Minutes
Sierra Front-Northwestern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council
April 29 - 30, 2003
Fallon
Convention Center, Fallon, Nevad
RAC Attendance and Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes
9:03
a.m. Tuesday, April 29, 2003 – Meeting Called to Order by Vice
Chairman Tina Nappe in the absence of Chairman Etchegoyhen with the
following members present:
MOVED - by John Falen to
set up a Three-RAC subgroup to discuss the landscape initiative
SECONDED – by Ernest Paine
DISCUSSION – Approved by acclamation
MOVED – by Larie
Trippet that our Chair and/or Vice Chair write a letter of
appreciation and commendation addressing it to Karen Boeger, Terry
Reed, the NCA staff, Don Klusman and whoever else is appropriate
thanking them for all their efforts during preparation of the Black
Rock NCA Plan.
SECOND – by Bill
Roullier
DISCUSSION - Approved by acclamation
MOVED - by Jim Eidel
that the RAC approve the OHV Guidelines
SECOND - by John Falen
DISCUSSION -
Approved by acclamation.
1. Tina Nappe said she would send letters to tourism on public lands panel members and express RAC concern that funding issues related to tourism on public lands, education and mitigation issues need to be more adequately addressed. She said she could also send copies to the other RACs and to Bob Abbey, BLM Nevada State Director and Bob Vaught Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Supervisor.
2. BLM Carson City agreed to approach a cell phone provider to explore providing cell phone coverage for Sand Mountain.
3.
Elayn Briggs was tasked with contacting people who were not at
the meeting, but would like to serve on the Sand Mountain RAC
subgroup. Jon Crowley
will be the main conduit for getting this information out to the
users.
Members of the RAC and BLM employees introduced
themselves.
National
RAC Conference in Washington & SNPLMA Round IV Discussion
National RAC Conference
Vice Chair Tina Nappe reported on the annual
meeting of Resource Advisory Councils that she attended in Washington,
DC. The agenda included a
number of briefings from key BLM officials including Secretary of the
Interior Norton and Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and
Budget Lynn Scarlett on such subjects as fire policy changes and
updates, and the Healthy Forests Initiative.
There was a three-hour presentation on invasive weeds.
BLM Director Kathleen Clarke expressed her enthusiasm for RACs
helping with weed issues in the West but was unable to attend the
session. Tina did not
hear how other RACs were involved, nor did RACs meet at the end of the
session to discuss how they might participate in this issue.
She felt RAC representatives were generally frustrated that
there was no time allotted to ask questions and discuss issues.
She brought back many materials that she will make available to
the members of the RAC including the Alaska RAC work plan.
Improvements in RAC structure and delays in RAC appointments
were also discussed. Suggestions
were made to improve the appointment procedure.
Tina distributed suggestions outlined by the Idaho joint RAC on
how to improve the nominating process.
Web page linkage for all RACs through the main BLM web site was
proposed. Tina
distributed information on what that design would look like.
The RACs also received a summary on ways to reduce the risk of
wildfires.
Tina said that she thought the meeting was very
interesting and appreciated the opportunity to attend and bring back
ideas. She thanked Jo
Simpson, Chief of the Nevada BLM State Office, Office of
Communications, who was instrumental in putting together the agenda
and gathering members to attend.
She told the group that a big issue was the
number of initiatives that are coming down from the Bureau and
Department level, often too late for local RACs to discuss.
“Is this important to us,” she asked the RAC, “and at
what point do we want to be involved?”
Suggestions were made on possible ways to control
invasive weeds. The
Nature Conservancy sponsored a reception on weeds.
Cheatgrass is being mapped where it currently exists and where
it is expected to spread. As
it spreads native ecosystems disappear.
Tina suggested that the RAC go on a field trip, do its own map
inventory and discuss efforts to address the problem.
She asked if this is something the RAC can become effectively
involved in.
Terry Reed told the group that an ongoing
inventory is in process in most BLM offices.
The Winnemucca Field Office is involved in three weed
districts. Annual
opportunities to plan weed control are circulated for signature among
many groups to facilitate inventory and control.
It takes a concerted effort to control invasive weeds.
There has been a full time weed position in the Winnemucca
office for about a year. There
are ongoing control activities aimed at the worst offenders as well as
sharing of application equipment among BLM and local and county
entities. This effort is
gaining momentum.
John Singlaub told the group that the Carson City
District is doing about the same thing.
There have been tests of different cheatgrass control methods.
The best way is to rehab quickly after fires, which is one of
the main focuses of the Great Basin Restoration Initiative.
Spectral imaging is also being used.
John told the group that he could show them some of the imaging
from the Carlin area. Results
from Elko and Ely show more weeds than expected.
The Carson City office is receiving funds to use spectral
imaging along the Sierra Front. Different
sources of funding are available.
Spreading Tall White Top is a real problem along the Truckee
River. John told the
members that he would welcome counsel from the RAC on this issue.
Terry told the members that there is a project
with the Wildfire Support Group that is a combination of fuels
management and rehab. There
is a program to reduce the seed production of undesirable species and
promote native species. The
cooperation of owners of contiguous land, especially in the
checkerboard area, is very helpful.
Jim Eidel told the group that what’s coming
after cheatgrass is what scares him.
He reminded them that Tina Nappe suggested that the RAC could
sponsor a panel addressing the impacts of invasive plants.
The main questions are: what can the RAC do and could a
subgroup be effective? Maybe
the RAC could identify sources of labor.
Sherm Swanson told the members that he thought it
would be useful to learn about successes of the last few years.
The order of magnitude of work has increased.
The question, he said, would be what is still challenging to
the Districts that the RAC could help with.
Terry told the group that the ability of the
private landowner to secure funding is difficult.
The private landowner who may own several different tracts
shouldn’t be counted on to attack this.
Sherm answered that the cheat grass issue is so
different from other issues. Cheat
grass is a fact of life. There
are a number of other weeds that we could keep out.
Tina commented that a steady source of funding is a real problem. To what extent are state and county governments helping to remove the problem or are they contributing to it? She suggested including this in the agenda for the RAC’s summer field trip in July and maybe asking a member of the Humboldt District to attend.
SNPLMA Round IV Discussion at Mohave-Southern RAC
Tina along with Jacques Etchegoyhen attended the SNPLMA Round IV discussion at the Mohave-Southern RAC meeting in April and the public meeting on this issue and former Senator Bryan’s proposal. There is some concern about the series of proposals in Northern Nevada.
There are opportunities to acquire lands.
There is interest in the green banking process in which
different ranches could be purchased.
The RAC may have some interest in this issue.
Larie Trippet told the group that he would like
to hear what the US Forest Service and BLM are proposing to do so that
the percentage of federally owned lands in Nevada does not grow.
John Singlaub commented that the Legacy Plan has
been discussed. Believe
it or not it is hard to dispose of land, he told the group.
At the state level we recognize clearly that there are lands
more appropriate in private ownership.
Conservation easements area a way to protect resources while
keeping land in private ownership.
There is a lot of misunderstanding about these easements and
what they are.
John Falen commented that a serious problem with
selling land in Nevada is that so much of the land is low in value.
The appraisal process takes a lot of time and is very costly.
This removes much of the incentive to buy land from the
government.
John Singlaub commented that overall the sale of
property spreads out the cost.
Terry Reed told the group that the Winnemucca
Field Office sold 80 acres in Orovada at over appraised value. The office received some funding this year dedicated to
upfront work. The
District has outlined a proposal to sell a variety of tracts in the
hundreds of acres up to a large tract of 9,000 acres proposed to be
sold to a single proponent. Plans
are to complete the appraisal process this year and the cultural
process next year. Washington
Office approval is needed for the largest direct sale ever.
Terry said that in his opinion BLM should be using all the
tools available to dispose of lands that are appropriate for disposal.
Field Managers’ Program Reports
Winnemucca Field Manager Terry Reed’s Report
1. Written Summary of the Report is available as Appendix 1.2.
Additional items covered orally.
a.
The Winnemucca Field Office has been working for almost two
years to dispose of some very old furniture and accommodate new staff,
especially the NCA staff. The process started in earnest about two weeks ago with the
development of a fairly detailed schedule.
Much of the old furniture will go to other offices. There are
pictures in the report of how the staff has been getting by. Set-up of the new modular furniture has begun and will be
completed next week.
Sherm
Swanson asked if the District has been very careful to see that no
important data has been lost. Terry
answered that about two years ago data stewards were established.
Mike Zielinski, Weed Specialist, has been working to assure
that much of vegetative data is recorded.
Most of the map and spatial data is being stored in the map
room or electronically. Data
stored in the map room has been cleared out and will be moved back in. Staff has been encouraged to get data into Central Files.
Second and third copies of things have been tossed, but
important records have been carefully preserved.
b.
Public meetings have been held for the NCA RMP.
Terry told the group that they would be hearing more about that
later in the meeting.
c.
Cauri Smith, a dedicated NCA Law Enforcement Ranger has been
added in Cedarville. She
will spend a lot of time in the backcountry.
d.
The last ranger position on the District was finally filled.
He came on board several weeks ago and was scheduled to
complete federal officer training, but about a week ago he was called
up to National Guard duty that may last a year.
Management has assured him that they will adjust to this.
e.
Six hundred and twenty acres of greenstripping were just
completed. There is more
about the rehab efforts in the written report.
f.
The Wildfire Support Group is receiving national attention in
how it has been set up to include private ranchers in the fire
suppression effort. There
is a lot of support for this group.
Karen
Boeger asked if all the fire rehab projects are or will be fenced.
Terry answered that specific vegetative objectives are set.
Deferment or a rest from grazing is built into that.
BLM rehab rules only allow temporary fencing and not all rehab
areas are fenced. Hundreds
of miles of fence have been built in the last few years.
One to two years is the average rest period.
g.
Wild horse gathers have taken place.
Tina
Nappe asked if BLM has the resources to keep moving the horses at the
rate the RAC has discussed. Terry
answered that there was a Nevada BLM workshop this week to discuss
strategy, but yes BLM is slipping.
John Singlaub added that BLM gathered more the first year than
they thought they would so more funding was used that year and less
funding was left for this year. Terry
told the group that there have been some funding shifts within the
state to accommodate this but BLM can only do so much. This
is a high priority for Bob Abbey.
h.
Winnemucca participated in a meeting in Reno on April 24 with
BLM State Office Renewable Resources, Winnemucca Fire, Fuels and
Renewable Resources, and UNR School of Agriculture to plan a proposal
to study the effectiveness of grazing to reduce fuel loadings in
certain areas of the District. Goals
and objectives were developed and agreed upon.
Five allotments were chosen and prioritized for the study based
on pre-identified criteria such as NEPA documents completed, T&E
species absent or present, grazing system in place, permittee input,
etc.
Karen Boeger asked if there is a plan to use prescriptive grazing in the five allotments and what the process is for using information in these studies. Terry told her that one of the guiding principles in this effort is to support it with intensive monitoring. There is tremendous variation in the processes used by operators. BLM wants to use timing monitoring and follow up treatment. This effort is at the ranchers’ initiative. BLM may try a combination of sheep and cattle in successive years so it will be a long process but the Bureau wants to substantially involve the operators and ag students in the monitoring. The District is looking to put a proposal and a package together now, probably for next year. A single NEPA document will probably be completed to address all five allotments. Meg Jensen, Deputy State Director Division of Natural Resources, Lands and Planning, told the group that a grazing policy input meeting was held in Winnemucca last week. John Falen was also at that meeting. It was a public workshop with approximately 30 people in attendance to introduce the Sustaining Working Landscapes initiative. The five parts of the initiative are:
Allotment
restructuring
Conservation
easements
Common
resource allotments
Conservation
partnerships
Endangered
Species Act mitigation
BLM is looking to
develop policy for its field offices.
Allotment restructuring, for example, may involve two allotment
operators taking two different strategies.
Operators displaced on their home allotments may go to other
allotments to graze their livestock.
Conservation projects on private lands could mean stream
channel enhancements, for instance, where the operator could do the
work for BLM as a contractor. These are only concepts right now. BLM has had a lot of discussion about involving the RACs.
Concept papers are in development that BLM would like to bring
back to the RACs. All of
the states are having these meetings. A national team will put together a white paper on these
concepts that will be distributed for broader review.
The grazing regulations are regulatory changes being proposed.
The landscape initiative is a complimentary track but
different. It is hoped
this initiative will be implemented by November 2003. John Singlaub added that Nevada is unique because it has
people on the lands throughout the year and because there is so much
BLM land in the state.
Tina Nappe told the RAC it might consider a committee to look at the proposals. This is an area where each RAC might want to have a subgroup due to the fact that the RAC only meets again in July and October. Terry commented that maybe a subgroup of all three RACs should be considered to match the timing of the proposals.
John
Falen told the group that the meeting in Winnemucca was a very good
one. There was a lot of
dialogue. He has just
spent a week in Washington with the grazing task force.
The idea of conservation easements has a lot of merit.
Reserved common allotments were a large part of the discussion,
but he feels that there are a lot of problems with them. The industry feels that this concept is not going to fly.
The permittee holds grazing rights to the allotment.
If he isn’t going to use it, he doesn’t need BLM to come in
and manage it. There is a
movement in the industry to reinstate the old advisory boards.
He told the group that it might be appropriate to have a
subgroup of the RACs to dovetail into the advisory boards. The
board could be composed of one member from a RAC and the balance
permittees.
MOVED - by John Falen to
set up a Three-RAC subgroup to discuss the landscape initiative.
SECONDED – by Ernest Paine
DISCUSSION - Approved by
acclamation.
i. Several issues acted on because of RAC counsel are included in the report. The staff is developing plans for the July field trip.
j. Several large mine actions are pending. The Getchell Mine is becoming more active again. The Coeur replacement bond and cash deposit have taken place. The field office is moving forward on the Ormat geothermal power plant expansion proposal.
John Mudge commented that the process is underway with the State to rework reclamation plans, bonding processes, etc.
k. A new EA dealing with Burning Man 2003 is nearly finished.
l. RAC members received a handout on the Lovelock Cave scenic byway.
m. Wind energy proposals are moving slowly and mapping has revealed a large overlap with sage-grouse leks.
n. NEPA has been completed in cooperation with several other agencies to complete Mormon cricket treatment. Some spraying has already been conducted.
o. There is a Wild Horse and Burro show including an adoption in Winnemucca in June.
p. The Porter Springs occupancy trespass resolution partnership has been put together to manage the site.
q.
The field office is working to put together a public/private
partnership workshop with Humboldt Development Authority, the City of Winnemucca,
Humboldt County, and the Winnemucca Convention and Visitors Authority
to promote economic development and tourism.
Karen Boeger asked about the latest information on the proposal for communication sites at Blue Lake. Terry answered that communication specialists are still looking at dead communication areas in that location.
Carson City Field Manager John Singlaub’s Report
1. Written Summary of the Report is available as Appendix 2.
2. Additional items covered orally.
a. The Walker River Mediation Team is still meeting and still hopeful.
b. There is no schedule for the release of the Walker River EIS. The impetus has been turned over to BOR because money for this was received through the Farm Bill.
c. BLM is in the process of getting the brothels demolished at Mustang Ranch so they can get on with what John told the group he considers the more important work. Some material from the Ranch is being auctioned on Ebay.
d. The field office has committed to a geothermal/wind energy consolidated resource management plan with Churchill County, the US Navy, the Bureau of Reclamation, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe.
e. BLM is struggling with Atlantic Richfield on Yerington Mine.
f. The field office has received two applications for inter-basin transfers of water into the north valley of Reno. The staff will be working on a single EIS for both.
Karen Boeger asked if the EIS covers impacts to wildlife even on private land. John answered, “Yes, BLM has to look at the whole project.”
g. Status hasn’t changed on the Sierra Pacific Tracy to Silver Lake project. BLM is looking at an alternative that goes up Antelope Valley that has received the most comment from the public.
h. BLM is looking to get a protest dismissal at a higher level for the North Douglas County Land Sale.
i. BLM is making sure a large scope of alternatives is included in the Pine Nut Plan Amendment. OHV use is being changed to existing roads and trails. The perception is that this is a closure. It is not. BLM is working with members of the public on this.
Larie Trippet asked if what was discussed at the OHV group meetings will be included in the alternatives. John answered that the ideas have been included in one of the alternatives. Larie said that there has been some perception by members of the group that they are not being involved.
Tina Nappe commented that the RAC has not been involved very much.
Jim Eidel, Larie Trippet, and Ernie Paine expressed interest in being involved in a Pine Nut subcommittee.
BLM is looking at fuels treatments for wildland/urban interface issues in the Pine Nut area and will be providing some of the materials for a biomass project with the City of Carson City.
j. The Carson City field office hopes to have four horse gathers this summer. It is anticipated that about 400 horses will be taken out of the four areas.
k. Following sufficient rain and snowfall, the Jack Wright Fuels Treatment Project is finally underway.
l. Public interest groups are dueling over the Wilson Canyon OHV area. The Wilson Canyon Alliance doesn’t agree with what it considers increased OHV use in the area.
m. BLM will be talking about Sand Mountain most of the day Wednesday. Fifty thousand dollars in fees have been collected so far.
n.
Stock water legislation has been proposed at the state level.
The original version allowed BLM to hold water rights jointly
with permittees, but the bill has been amended to exclude this right. BLM has sent out a letter outlining its position.
Legislation has passed the State Senate.
A member of the public asked if BLM has an
estimate of how much money will be brought in at Sand Mountain this
year. John answered that
it would be approximately $100,000.
Matt Spaulding, BIA, asked John Singlaub to elaborate on BLM’s cooperation with the Pine Nut Allotments Association. John told him that the Pine Nut Owners Association’s concerns are OHVs crossing private property and rights-of-way. Right now there is no communication with the allotment owners. BLM can’t find out their names. Matt asked if BLM has gone through the BIA Superintendent’s Office to identify the allotment owners. He said he would ask through the Superintendent’s Office if a scoping letter could be sent to the allotment owners. Matt also announced that there will be a new BIA resource officer starting May 5, Steve Brown.
Black Rock – High Rock NCA Plan Update
Ester Hutchison, NCA Planning and Environmental
Coordinator, displayed wall maps used at the recent public meetings to
show proposed closures of OHV routes for the different alternatives.
She told the group that the public comment period for the Draft
Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails NCA and Associated
Wildernesses EIS/RMP closes June 16. A total of 103 people attended the public meetings held in
Winnemucca, Gerlach, Cedarville, Sacramento, and Reno.
Winnemucca and Gerlach each had 11 attendees and Cedarville had
35.
The next steps in the process after the comment
period closes are to review the comments received and develop the
proposed RMP based on them, publish the final EIS and proposed RMP,
initiate the 30-day protest period and concurrent 60-day governor’s
consistency review, publish the Record of Decision and develop the
implementation plan.
The BLM is still on track to meet the
Congressional deadline of December 20, 2003, three years from
enactment of the law that created the NCA, but barely.
They are still pushing to make it.
The next RAC NCA subgroup meeting is May 9.
Another meeting is planned in June to go over anything that
wasn’t discussed in May and to thank the subgroup for their work.
Ester distributed very brief summaries of the
alternatives by resource.
Larie Trippet asked what the consequences are if
BLM doesn’t meet the deadline.
Ester told him that there are no penalties.
Terry Reed told the group that BLM has made a very strong
commitment to meet the deadline.
If there hadn’t been many months of delays getting federal
register notices published, BLM would be meeting it with time to
spare.
Tom Baker, US Forest Service, asked if the OHV
closures conflict with the legislation that says no routes would be
closed. Terry answered
that the legislation actually says BLM can designate routes open and
closed in the planning effort. This
has been BLM’s interpretation for quite some time.
The alternatives include different designations.
Inholding access would not be impacted.
Don Klusman, Chairman of the NCA Subgroup, told
the members of the RAC that when they formed the subgroup and the
group started talking about this there were a lot of sideboards or
constraints that needed to be addressed.
The group has come together better than any he has participated
in, he told them. He said he wanted to thank this RAC and the Northeast
California RAC for supporting the NCA Subgroup and to commend the NCA
staff. “They thought if
they gave us more work we would go away, he said, but they gave us
more work and we worked them harder!”
The group is hoping for no protests, no lawsuits.
He commended the people that are on the subgroup as well as the
members of the RACs. He
commended Jamie Thompson, NCA Staff Writer-Editor, who he said he
communicated with him quite often, especially on agendas.
He also extended kudos to Ester.
Kathleen Clarke has commended the group for all its work, he
said, and he wanted to come to the meeting and give the RAC his
commendation.
Tina Nappe thanked Don on behalf of the RAC and
thanked the members of the group and the staff.
Karen Boeger also thanked Don and added that much of what the
subgroup has accomplished is due to his abilities.
Terry Reed added that all, including the contractor, the staff,
the subgroup, and the public have cooperated in this effort.
Rochanne Downs, Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe,
told the group that as a member of the subgroup she wanted to ask if
the plan and discussions on the plan had happened between BLM and the
Tribes on a government-to-government level.
She said that she wanted to make sure that the other Tribes are
involved. Terry Reed
answered that the consultation process, especially with the Summit
Lake Tribe, is underway. BLM
is certainly open to further consultation with any Tribe that wants to
be involved. Jamie
Thompson commented that a letter was sent to each Tribe BLM was aware
wanted to be involved within the last 30 days.
That was the third mailing.
He said it would be helpful if BLM knew who all the other
players are. The first
two mailings went to Tribal chairs, so the last mailing went to the
entities and not to just one person.
Matthew Spaulding, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
representative, asked that BLM send the letter to the BIA not just the
Tribes, because sometimes communication breaks down between the
different entities. Sometimes
Tribes can’t afford to come to the meetings.
He asked that BLM communicate with his office and they can
facilitate the entities getting together.
Jamie told him that BLM would be glad to come to the Tribes.
Terry added that BLM needs to know that the Tribes want them at
their meetings and to be on their agenda.
BLM will make sure that staff has Matt’s name and address and
sends copies of those letters to him.
Jamie said that he believed the staff had done that, but they
will make sure that the BIA office gets them in the future.
Karen Boeger commented that it would be very
helpful if all RAC members could get their comments to the subgroup
before May 9. She said
the summaries that were distributed should be very helpful in making
comments.
Terry commented that it might be helpful for the
team to find out if everyone means to submit some comments and set up
a date.
Bill Roullier told the members that he had one
comment that he planned to submit.
From a transportation and rights-of-way viewpoint the closure
or undergrounding of the utility corridors, particularly in one case,
would be cost-prohibitive and this is an issue.
As it enters the area, the corridor is in the vicinity of the
Applegate-Lassen Trail. He
said he would suggest that providing another alternative would be
constructive. He said he
thought with some discussion some other ways could be found to
mitigate any problems. Ester
commented that the portion that would have to go underground is in
Alternative B; the three miles that cross the Trail.
Don Klusman added that the issue was discussed a lot and the
subgroup hoped that they could get some comments from the RAC members.
Jim Eidel commented that this is also a
sage-grouse issue. There
is a much wider impact than was previously known.
Terry said that he doesn’t think that is an issue in terms of
this particular corridor in that particular location.
Sherm Swanson commented that the vegetative
management section strikes him as problematic.
He said that Objective 2 on page 212, single species management for
sage-grouse, seemed to him to be a little narrow and tying BLM’s
hands.
Larie Trippet commented that so many diverse
groups have been involved that he finds it difficult to nitpick at
this time.
MOVED - by Larie Trippet
that our Chair and/or Vice-Chair write a letter of appreciation and
commendation addressing it to Karen Boeger, Terry Reed, the NCA staff,
Don Klusman and whoever else should be appropriate, thanking them for
all their efforts.
SECOND – by Bill
Roullier
DISCUSSION - Approved by
acclamation.
Tina Nappe pointed out that such a letter had
already been sent and although Don Klusman had not been included it
would certainly be appropriate to include him.
Tina suggested that before the lunch break each
RAC member talk about one activity that they had been involved in the
last few months that the RAC could be involved in, but the group
decided there was not enough time before the lunch break to accomplish
this.
Promoting Tourism on Public Lands in Nevada & Mitigating
Its Impacts - Panel Discussion
The RAC has been very concerned about rural
communities and how they can be brought into the tourism arena. In preparation for this meeting each panelist was given
approximately eight minutes to talk about tourism.
Rick Gray, Executive Director, Fallon Convention
and Tourism Authority, told the group that it is very important that
government agencies work with communities like Fallon.
In a recent case assessment of OHV fees at Sand Mountain was
done without input from the city or the county.
It’s difficult to go forward without that cooperation.
The states can go out ahead of the governmental agencies and
promote resources creating a danger of contaminating the resources.
Rick said that he sees challenges there.
The State is doing a great job of promoting
Nevada. The Convention
and Visitors Authority works very well with BLM.
The group is currently updating a brochure and visitors guide
including an itinerary of places that visitors can visit over a
two-day period. Rick said that in helping to develop these itineraries he has
discovered a wealth of treasures in Churchill County. He pointed out the brochure “America on the Edge” and
said Churchill County hopes to develop something like it.
Tom Baker, State and Private Forestry Liaison,
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, told the group that he works
directly for the Forest Supervisor with state and private forestry.
His group distributes grant money. One
of the requirements for a grant is that a community has to have 25
percent of its economy dependent on the National Forest.
In Nevada this occurs through tourism.
The group supports recreation through the Forest Service and
the Forest Service grants program.
Rural community assistance grants up to $10,000 can support
anything a community is looking for from museums, trails, boardwalks,
to community center studies, and much more.
He said it is really exciting to see some of the projects that
communities come up with. The
National Forest has also been working closely with BLM on wildfire
fuels projects. What they
are looking for in rural assistance grants is something to promote
recreation but also the rural economy.
Recreation equals quality of life equals economic development.
Recreation is a key component of economic development.
It is a key component for the future of Nevada.
Larry Friedman, Nevada Commission on Tourism
& JoLynn White, Commission Marketing Director, told the group that
two years ago the Commission started an infrastructure grant program
up to $200,000. The
program has been implemented only once to fund 20 projects.
The Commission has requested an increase in grant money, but
has not received one.
The Commission is the leading agency for the
state Scenic Byway program. It
has divided the state into five geographic territory areas with a
sixth “cultural” area. Anyone
wanting to attend one of the territory meetings is welcome.
On the federal level, 13 western state tourism entities have
entered into an MOU with federal agencies.
Larry said he has wondered if the issues at the local level
have been taken into consideration during the dialogue with these
agencies.
The new Nevada Commission campaign “Nevada, Bring It On” is an adventure campaign that
promotes recreation particularly on public land.
This campaign has received much media attention and
controversy. He showed
some of the photo boards for the campaign.
He commented that the people in them will certainly make people
notice them in a magazine, but the question is will they get people to
make a phone call. Also,
are the people being attracted the kind who will respect the land.
The impacts of this campaign are being researched.
Jim Deloney, Parks Program Manager, Nevada State
Parks, distributed information from Nevada State Parks, “Planning
for Visitors While Conserving the Resources.”
The State Park system has a $10 million budget and 24
operational units covering 132,524 total acres including: 77,309
state-owned; 55,215 leased (including 4,960 BLM R&PP,
520 US Forest Service Special Permit and 49,736 Bureau of
Reclamation/MISCL). This
breaks out to about $3.15 in O&M costs per visitor, with 3.34
average staff per park, and 35,041 average park users per FTE staff.
The Nevada State Park System Plan was developed
in 1997. Twenty-four
detailed development plans, one for each park, were developed in other
years. The legislative
direction is to “acquire, protect, develop and interpret a
well-balanced system of areas of outstanding scenic, recreational,
scientific and historical importance for the inspiration, use and
enjoyment of the people of the State of Nevada…”
The estimated economic impact of Nevada State Parks on the
Nevada economy is $149 million annually, which Jim said he thinks is a
conservative estimate.
Dr. Dunn, a well known planning and tourism
professor and advocate, says tourism development should be balanced
with environmental protection. People
often don’t understand the complexity of the infrastructure needed
to support tourism. Tourism
is always destination based. The
natural resource base is the most underutilized.
Business, nonprofits and all government entities will be most
effective in meeting the needs of visitors if they understand that
tourism is dynamic not static, and emphasize cooperation and
coordination to satisfy visitor needs without endangering the
environment and natural and cultural resources.
Planning is the prime missing ingredient.
Tina Nappe commented that the RAC’s concern as
a Resource Advisory Council is resources on public lands, and how the
different entities can work together to mitigate impacts.
Larie Trippet commented that “The Dirt” is a great publication in terms of the opportunities it lists in Nevada but that three things would make it better. The concepts of Tread Lightly and Leave No Trace should be added. It should be enhanced to mitigate conflicts between users by making known where you other user groups might be encountered. And readers should be informed where they can get information on other lands such as BLM, USFS, etc. Larry Friedman told him that is easy today with web sites.
Tom Baker commented that a number of surveys have
been done by communities.
Jim Eidel commented that he heard the four
panelists say quite a bit concerning promotion and very little
concerning mitigation. If
we can’t mitigate the impact of these people are we right in
promoting their coming?
Terry Reed commented that he sees private
partners as helping promotion. Millions
of people drive by things in Nevada and don’t even know they’re
there. There are a lot of things we could do to help people use it
and not hurt it.
John Singlaub commented that the statistic that
is the most meaningful to him is that all the staff of the federal
recreation and land management agencies in the Las Vegas area is
smaller than the culinary staff at the Bellagio.
Tina Nappe asked Larry Friedman if there was any
concern in Fallon about the cost of maintaining Sand Mountain, the
impact of garbage, etc. John
Singlaub clarified that BLM did go before the board of Churchill
County for the fee plan at Sand Mountain.
Rick Gray answered Fallon is very concerned about the resource,
keeping it clean, managing it. He
said he thought the county would be very interested in establishing
some partnerships among the lodging and food industries in Fallon.
Bill Roullier commented he wasn’t sure what
(sic) they are trying to attract with “The Dirt.”
One of the things I manage is the River Rock that is on Sierra
Pacific property, private property that you are telling people to
climb, he said. Larry
Friedman answered his reaction would be that they are trying to
attract no one. His
concern is that by being so out there the publication attracts
attention for the moment or even reinforces an impression of nothing
being out there.
Larie Trippet commented that the book attracts a
very young, active audience. It’s
a valuable target to aim at, but maybe it’s too small a target to
aim at.
Larry Friedman answered that at this point any
kind of economic development is good, especially for the small
communities. It’s all
relative.
Tom Baker commented that he would really like to
take a look at what demographics this campaign is looking at. These people can play all day, but they can also play all
night (at the casinos). He
said that his personal opinion is that someone has to pull all the
state and federal agencies together and ask them where they are going
for the next five years.
Jim DeLoney commented that Nevada Parks program
got zero for planning in the last appropriation.
He said that what he’s trying to get people to understand is
that many of our visitors are going to show up because of the
promotion of the gambling industry whether we do anything or not.
Sherm Swanson commented that a lot of the
visitors that are being talked about come to the rural parts of Nevada
from other parts of Nevada as well as out of state.
Weed seeds brought by these visitors are going to bring new
problems that Nevadans will have to deal with.
He asked if there are tourism dollars that can help with range
health. Larry Friedman answered that the rural grant program was
supposed to accomplish this with only $200,000, and that there is not
much that can be done. When
the 13 western states get together the front line people are not
there, the ones who know the impacts on the land.
Maybe it was naïve on our part, he told the group, to think
that we were talking to these people in the federal agencies through
the MOUs. We will
continue to promote outdoor recreation as a new tool whatever the
campaign is, he told them. The
real question is how we take care of the needs of the visitor and the needs of the land.
John Singlaub commented that BLM Nevada suffers
at the national level because it’s thought of as a mining and
livestock state. We are
twelfth in funding (for recreation), but more people are coming.
Larry Friedman commented that for the most part they all share the same concerns, but where do they take it from here?
Jim Eidel commented fish and wildlife figures have shown that there are more bird watchers in the US than hunters or golfers. You’re focusing on the adventure that is only the adventure of the young people. Larry Friedman answered that is why he mentioned the Nevada Commission grant program.
Jim DeLoney commented that his experience has been that we drastically under price to begin with and then have trouble raising it. He said he thinks the cost at Sand Mountain is much too low.
Terry Reed commented that funding changes through
“legislation, litigation, and lawsuit.”
Karen Boeger commented that recreation may or may
not promote quality of life depending on how it is managed.
Promotion of recreation has to go hand in hand with a respect
for the land and being prepared for what is out there.
Rather than trying to dumb down the place, educate the people
to the place. She said
she doesn’t see that kind of information being provided.
Federal agencies should educate but not promote.
Larry Friedman commented that it wouldn’t be up
to the land agencies to do the promoting.
He said he would like to give the RAC information on any
meetings that the federal agencies and tourism might have together.
He said that he could put a condition on a grant saying that if
you receive this money education must be part of the promotion.
The grant opportunities will be offered in June.
He said that he doesn’t have the expertise to do this but
would be glad to receive it from Karen or the federal agencies.
Jim DeLoney commented that the different entities
are going to have to be very proactive to direct the activities where
they want them to be. The
nonprofits are doing some of the best work right now in cooperation
with the public agencies.
Terry Reed commented that the understanding has
to be how it all fits together. One
issue at a time can be really contentious.
Especially in rural Nevada, we need to look at what we want the
State to look like in the future.
Tom Baker commented that people come in with
pre-conceived notions. We
have to let people know what we can do.
John Singlaub commented that regionally or at
some local level coming together makes a lot of sense.
BLM is in such a reactionary mode where recreation is
concerned.
Karen Boeger commented that BLM should promote a
nationwide program right away like the previous litterbug program, and
find every way in the State of Nevada to promote the idea that “you
shall stay on designated routes.”
Tom Baker commented that the green sticker program is great, but the problem is that it got so political. A way has to be figured out so that that won’t happen and a way to fund it.
Jim Eidel commented that he didn’t hear
anything positive in respect to funding.
He said it is also an education problem, that he didn’t see
them getting there yet for mitigation.
Tina Nappe said that what the RAC can do is on an educational
level. Sherm Swanson
suggested that maybe the RAC could say that BLM should not promote
recreation unless they get funding to manage it.
Larie Trippet said that didn’t see how that was workable.
He asked what promoting is.
He said he doesn’t see the BLM advertising and promoting
outside of Nevada for people to come here.
Terry Reed said he thought the RAC was talking about working
toward some type of comprehensive picture, not just funding.
Tina Nappe said that ideally she would see the RACs working
together at a state level, that some type of state forum is needed.
Terry suggested that this could be part of a rural economic
development conference, a Governor’s tourism conf, or a land summit.
Tina said that the group could at least put together the
recommendations they do have and Larie Trippet commented that maybe
they could get the two Bob’s to talk to Governor Guinn.
Tom Baker told them that he thought they were going in the wrong direction. He said it needs to come from the Governor or the Lieutenant Governor. A tourism summit needs to be set up. All the members of the RAC have to do is get the same enthusiasm that they have now with the other RACs and have them talk about it to everyone else.
Jim Eidel asked John Singlaub if a new generation
of management plans would contain implementation of mitigation.
John Singlaub said that they would, but if budget is not there
mitigation will not be done. Jim asked if it would be appropriate for the RAC to make
recommendations that the new generation of management plans contain
direction to identify recreation mitigation.
John said BLM can put those in, but they will not be
implemented if there is not the funding to do it.
A motion that the RAC receive the administrative draft of the Pine Nuts management plan and revisit the recreation portion at a later time died due to lack of a second. Vice Chair Nappe pointed out that the subcommittee of Jim Eidel, Ernie Paine and Larie Trippet will look at these topics.
Copies of the OHV Administration Guidelines for
Nevada Public Lands were distributed to the RAC.
Karen Boeger and Lari Trippet, Sierra Front RAC representatives
to the statewide RAC subcommittee on OHV standards and guidelines,
reported to the group.
Karen told the members that the subcommittee
received a lot of input at the Tri-RAC meeting last October.
Larie told the group that the committee met again after the
Tri-RAC meeting and took action on every comment.
They compromised on some issues, incorporated others. Unless there is a strong majority opinion on some issue, he
and Karen hope the RAC will approve the Guidelines.
Jim Eidel asked who they would see monitoring the
impacts, that he heard funding issues concerns from BLM on carrying
out monitoring. Terry
Reed told him that monitoring would probably at best be reacting to
something. Jim then asked
if the OHV community monitors itself.
Larie told him that there are some parts of the OHV community
that do not want to be monitored, let alone monitor themselves.
He said the committee members went round and round on the
funding issue. Lack of funding does not preclude what they want to happen.
Robert Kautz commented that he thought monitoring was just a
natural outcome of these activities.
John Mudge asked if the Guidelines being out there improve the possibility of future funding.
Terry Reed told him that it doesn’t, that
funding seems to be tied to administrative initiative.
Jim Eidel asked what the chances there are of
distributing the Guidelines to the OHV community. Larie told him that
if the document is approved it will go to Bob Abbey.
The use of the document is in the managers’ use and efforts.
Meg Jensen suggested that the members vote in
favor of the Guidelines. She
told them that the Guidelines having been approved by three RACs would
make BLM more competitive for funding.
She said she thought it a good idea to distribute them to the
OHV community.
Jim Eidel suggested that the OHV Administrative
Guidelines be sent out to the OHV users after they are approved and
that the RAC recommend that BLM distribute them to the users as they
see fit. (One of the RAC
members thought this was a motion, and provided a second, but the
supposed maker of the motion said that it was not intended to be a
motion. All of the
suggestions made in discussion of the supposed motion are included in
these minutes.)
Larie told the group that a portion of OHV users
is hunters and it would be hard to get the Guidelines to them. Don Klusman commented that if these were approved they would
be referred to in every Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) that is done.
Terry Reed told the members that the Guidelines are a
recommendation to the Bureau and if they are distributed it should be
by BLM. Larie told the group that the target audience was the BLM
land managers.
Sherm Swanson suggested that a press release
should go out saying that these were approved by the three RACs as
recommendations to BLM.
Jim Eidel commented that the next to last line in
the preamble states “…administrators can use the educational
guidelines…to inform the public on OHV use issues and ethics,”
that he doesn’t have any problem leaving it up to BLM and the user
groups to distribute it. At
the very least it should go to the OHV user groups and the hunter user
groups and they should be told to pay particular attention to these
four pages.
Karen commented that she thought the idea of a
press release geared toward the users was a good idea, particularly
toward the mule deer group incorporating the Tread Lightly education
information.
Mark Struble suggested that all the suggestions
go in the letter to Bob Abbey.
Matt Spaulding told the members that he was
seeing a red flag as to how these groups would disseminate this
information to all the users that may be impacted.
Terry Reed commented that there is nothing in the
document that causes an on-the-ground immediate change.
Things are encouraged that BLM can affect in a management plan.
MOVED - by Jim Eidel
that the RAC approve the OHV Guidelines.
SECOND - by John Falen
DISCUSSION -
Approved by acclamation.
The RAC will follow up on the suggestions made at their next meeting.
Bernie Romero not being present, Jim Linebaugh,
Range Consultant, and Ed Depaoli gave the presentation.
Jim Linebaugh told the group that there are six grazing advisory boards, one for each BLM District. The old boards served a variety of functions, worked with BLM on the use of 8100 grazing funds, and did a lot of problem solving. The new boards are set up mostly to administer the 12 ½ percent of the grazing fees monies. Lately there has been a significant change in the amount of money given to the boards and there has been some concern over this. There has been some thought that there should be something to supplement the role of the RACs because they discuss so many different issues, something to strengthen the role of grazing. This was discussed at the grazing regulations meeting in Winnemucca. Bob Abbey said that there was no reason that this could not be done. What Bernie Romero suggests is a joint meeting of the RAC and the two grazing boards that cover lands administered by the Winnemucca and the Carson City BLM. The idea is to see what kind of ideas would come from this interaction.
Terry Reed advised that as a subgroup of the RAC
the group could advise on projects but not advise on spending the 8100
money. Recommendations
could not be made on projects based on their costs.
The RAC charter prohibits it.
Tina Nappe told the group that her concern is
whether there is going to be a commitment by non-ranchers over time to
participate in some of these issues.
The value for the non-ranching community would be tremendous.
She wondered if it would be worthwhile to do a test case with
an integrated component.
John Falen commented that the grazing boards with
a RAC component could still be involved in disputes.
Ed DePaoli said what he thought Bennie was getting at was that the grazing boards were asking to give the RAC their input on such things as sage grouse and asked if they are willing to listen.
Terry Reed told the members that to not exceed
per diem limits the BLM field office is suggesting that some of the
meals and the camp for the July field trip be done in-house.
(BLM later decided to hire an outfitter for the meals and the
camp.) The area they are
suggesting that the RAC visit is in the Montana Mountains.
Aspen cloning, sage-grouse, weeds, and fire cycle
have already been suggested as topics for the field trip. Other speakers were suggested in the meeting today.
The RAC wants to look at where there is a need and where these
things have been successful.
John Singlaub told the members that he wanted to
talk to John Mudge about how interaction between boards and RACs is
done in the mining industry before the grazing boards are contacted. This may be accomplished before the July meeting.
Some presentations on the landscape initiative and looking at the Pine Nut Plan Amendment would be valuable at the July meeting.
This is a response by BLM to an inquiry for more
information on the Fee Demo Project at Sand Mountain.
Dean Kinerson, Carson City Field Office plant
ecologist, presented a slide program on the Sand Mountain inventory of
January 2003.
Dean began the presentation by showing a map of
the area showing the deep drainage on the west side, the dunes and
Stillwater Mountains on the north side, and an aerial photograph of
the drainage area. OHV
use is designated limited on the south side and open on the north
side.
There are a number of sensitive species in the area. This inventory focused on the Sand Mountain blue butterfly. There are also four plants and a number of bee species on the sensitive species list. The global rating of many of the species in the area is still unknown. The blue butterfly, scarab beetle, click beetle and two species of bee are endemic to Sand Mountain.
Several slides showed the butterfly in various stages of development. Also shown was a photo of the larvae being tended by an ant. The ant is able to extract a benefiting excretion from the larvae. There is more than one species of ant associated with the butterfly.
The sand dune is a combination of active and stable. The plant can adapt as it is buried by the sand but is more adaptable to burial than excavation. It interacts with other plants in the area. The shrub area in 2002 was about 1,000 acres.
High density of trails through vegetation has been observed in areas where vehicles travel from the drainage up the dune, make a tight turn at the top and go back down.
There is encroachment of roads in habitat that is in the best condition, which in Dean’s opinion shows continual degradation of habitat.
78 percent of the plants
surveyed are large mature shrubs
16.5 percent are
intermediate plants
5.1 percent are young
plants
More study will have to be done to discover true impacts.
They showed that there were not as people assumed in the 1990s little activity in the north area and thus little impacts. Every area of the shrub areas has been impacted to some extent by 2002.
On the entire planet the Sand Mountain butterfly exists only in the Sand Mountain area. This is its only habitat.
In 1996 Congress implemented the Fee Demo Act. In Fall 2001 the first publication went out to the newspapers on fee demo for Sand Mountain. Flyers were handed out to everyone who came in. Vehicles in the area were counted over Memorial Day Weekend. In August 2002 BLM published proposed fee rules, open for 30 days of comments. Most of the comments were to increase law enforcement, grade the roads better and put in more bathrooms.
Spring and fall are the busy times.
John Singlaub told the group that the Churchill County Commission estimates that Sand Mountain is the largest single tourist attraction in the county.
Jon Crowley, Friends of Sand Mountain said he wanted to make sure that everyone at the meeting understands that the Sand Mountain butterfly is only known to exist at Sand Mountain.
Jon Crowley told the group that Friends would like to see more vehicles BLM could use to help with health and safety. Chris told him that she is limited in the uses of fee money, but she can use it for health and safety. It costs $106,000 to manage Sand Mountain. Rochanne and her boss have been at the area helping with EMT. Chris spends most of her time on the fee pad.
Chris told the group that volunteers could be
used to help collect fees. There
is no fee to go to the Pony Express Station or to go in for a half
hour or less.
Jim Bramham commented that he would like to see education on taking out your own trash. If BLM handles visitors’ trash they will have the expectation that BLM will continue to handle it.
Chris told him that BLM has looked at a
self-serve fee box or web site payment.
The Tribe may help sell passes at their store and not charge
expenses to BLM.
The color of the weekly pass changes monthly. The weekly passes cost 69 cents a piece to print. A packet of information comes with each pass.
· Speeding through camps and near pedestrians, there should be regs for this
· Whip use flags on all vehicles
· DUIs
· Institute the checkered flag program which means a person with a checkered flag stands for and supports safe use
· A cell phone provider covering the area. (BLM agreed to approach a provider)
·
Keep Sand Mountain open
Friends of Sand Mountain would like to see added cooperation between their group and BLM on vegetation and butterflies. They can help collect information, observe, and get information out to the public.
Jim Bramham commented that the noise from all the vehicles has been reduced by Federal regs.
We like to share our culture. It is our inherent responsibility to protect these lands. This is our church. We hope that people will give that same respect. It concerns us when plants are being destroyed. You can’t rejuvenate seed that no longer exists. The black streaks on the Mountain are new.
Robert Kautz asked what the area of effect is for the area. Chris Miller told him that there is no formal designation at Sand Mountain. There are 35 sites within the boundary of the area, but the Mountain itself is not designated. There is a lot more dialogue now with NAGPRA.
Terry Reed told the group that an application has
been put in to exclude Sand Mountain from mineral exploration. Boundaries were formed to enclose the Mountain, the Pony
Express Station and things like that.
BLM didn’t know about the buckwheat.
A special recreation management area includes several areas all
managed and monitored as one.
The third presentation was by a representative of
the Nature Conservancy. She
told the group that the Nature Conservancy’s goal is to preserve the
area and the bio-diversity in the Great Basin.
The Nature Conservancy surveyed about 72 million acres to find
a place that would preserve this bio-diversity.
Sand dunes are very important for this preservation.
The assessment came up with 359 sites that are very important. Sand Mountain is one of them. The area has vegetative active dunes as well as active dunes.
Karen Boeger asked who was on the team.
The Nature Conservancy representative told her that the team
consisted of academics, environmental staff from Fallon Naval Air
Station and BLM people. There
is scientific data that shows that at this point there are species
that are restricted to this sand dunes.
The Nature Conservancy would like to increase their knowledge
of these restricted species.
Jim Bramham told the group that he would like a list of people on the survey team. He said that people who use the area would have been happy to be included. The Nature Conservancy representative told him that they included people with the scientific knowledge.
Jon Crowley asked if vegetative and nonvegetative could be better defined. The Nature Conservancy representative defined it as the active versus the stabilized dune.
Robert Kautz asked if a new Plan would be needed. John Singlaub told him that they have a plan now, but it would need amendments. BLM is working with Churchill County on a joint plan. Churchill County is expressing a lot of interest in expanding a destination OHV area. A lot is going to rely on the help of the people out there like Friends of Sand Mountain.
Tina Nappe told the RAC that Sand Mountain is a signature place. Unfortunately it can stand a lot of use without that damage. It can be a destination area. It also has many endemic species. She said she hoped that the board would never be an encouragement to do away with endemic species. They have informally talked about setting up a TRT. She suggested that they do that as a group with the first task that they look at immediate impact. She said she thought they could do that with only the members present. She told them that this is the first fee demo area in the Carson City/Winnemucca Districts so they can really look at what the needs are. In Washington there was talk of making the fee areas permanent. Earlier Larie (Trippet) had agreed to be the RAC’s rep on a TRT. Certainly more people are needed from the group present at the meeting.
Tina Nappe told the group that one issue is that not one species be listed. The other issue is can the management needs be met with the current fee structure. If the subgroup could be formally established by the end of June and meet by the end of July… She asked if they could talk about the broad OHV use in other areas in another forum since there is specific need at Sand Mountain.
A member of the BLM Carson City Field Office staff commented that other species are active at other times of the year.
Dean commented that the study areas are at the top of the large ridge to the west and the swales to the east. He said he’s talking about closing a large area to allow for the study.
Jon Crowley told BLM that they have an
opportunity now, in about three weeks is the busiest weekend of the
year, to educate the users as much as possible.
Friends could help to hand out information, to revise the
information.
Terry Reed commented that focusing on just damage to vegetation would be valuable.
John Singlaub told him that the Friends of Sand Mountain logo on it would be more effective than the BLM logo.
Dan Jacquet commented that BLM has heard the recommendation that they need to protect the existing vegetation. If that is an objective, he said, and there is enough information to make that decision, let’s make it today.
Tina Nappe said that she thought she needed to be part of the subgroup.
Tina asked if the people who go out there could be offered more than what they came out for.
Meeting
Adjourned at 3:53 PM
Please contact the Nevada RAC Coordinator for further information.
| This
page was created by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Office of Public Affairs 1849 C Street, Room 406-LS Washington, DC 20240 Phone: (202) 452-5125 Fax: (202) 452-5124 |
Please contact the NI_Webteam with any questions relating to accessibility of documents. Download Adobe Acrobat Reader 5 |
This
is a U.S. Government Computer System. Before continuing, please read
this disclaimer and
privacy
statement. |